Bloomberg TV

On Wednesday’s edition on Bloomberg’s With All Due Respect, co-host Mark Halperin admitted what many on the left probably wouldn’t dare to. He admitted that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s comments about Donald Trump have not been as controversial as they should be because she’s a liberal. “If a Republican justice did that to a Democratic candidate, I think, the world explode,” Halperin exclaimed to co-host John Heilemann.

On Wednesday, Congressional Republicans demanded FBI Director James Comey to appear before the House Oversight Committee to answer questions about his recommendation to not prosecute Hillary Clinton. The hearing was set to held the following Thursday, but Bloomberg’s John Heilemann thought Republicans are too incompetent to hold the hearing. “They have, as you know, bundled -- bungled these kinds of inquiries before, over and over and over again. But, most recently, with the Benghazi matter,” he argued on With All Due Respect.

Contributing to the media's rush to discredit Donald Trump's resurrecting of former President Bill Clinton's marital infidelities in his campaign against wife Hillary, Bloomberg's With All Due Respect co-host John Heilemann chided Trump on Thursday for "play[ing] the rape card" and predicted it'd be of no benefit to him going forward towards November.

Donald Trump has wasted no time in "going there": accusing Hillary Clinton of being an enabler of Bill's sexual misconduct with women. So will the MSM ask Hillary about her role in hushing up the scandals, intimidating the women, etc? No, according to Mark Halperin, not unless the MSM is "forced" to do so.

Said Halperin on today's With All Due Respect, "I don't think a reporter will ask unless they're basically forced to." Halperin and Heilemann did hold out one intriguing possibility: that some "new information, some more recent information" about Bill's peccadilloes could force the MSM's hand. Added Halperin tantalizingly, with Heilemann's agreement: "Trump thinks he knows some new facts, by the way."

With the Indiana primary a day away the liberal media is franticly pushing the narrative that Ted Cruz is going to lose and Donald Trump is destined to be the nominee. “It's hard to think of Ted Cruz as a human being in the same week when Boehner called him Lucifer,” smeared Nicolle Wallace on Bloomberg’s With All Due Respect. Co-host of the show John Heilemann declared Indiana was the end of line for Cruz, “this was the last stand for the Never Trump movement.”

Will this stem the MSM's flood of deserved praise for Prince? It turns out that Touré--better known in these parts as a former spoke in MSNBC's since-cancelled Cycle--is also a Prince biographer, his book published in 2013.

Appearing on With All Due Respect today, Touré cited two sources: Prince's former sound engineer, and a member of his band, for the proposition that Prince was a "conservative" and a "Republican." Touré embraced the notion himself, but, being a liberal, described what it means to be a conservative in pejorative terms: "I am making money, I'm successful, I want this money and this success protected . . . When you are rich, you want status quo."

From bathrooms to abortions, Bloomberg's John Heilemann believes that in his heart, Donald Trump is a social liberal. Heilemann made his assertion on today's With All Due Respect in the context of discussing Trump's comments on a Today town hall this morning in which he was critical of the North Carolina transgender bathroom law, and said he'd have no problem letting Caitlyn Jenner choose any bathroom.

Heilemann: "Trump is probably, I think in his gut, a social liberal. I think his position on abortion, for instance, the ["very pro-choice"] position he held for most of his life, is the real position . . . I think on this issue he's like most Manhattanites or most New Yorkers: he's basically a social liberal."

It was quite an amusing moment yesterday on Bloomberg's With All Due Respect when Mark Halperin corrected his co-host, John Heilemann, on delegate math history. As you can see in the video below, Heilemann asserted that Donald Trump was not doing as well as he should be because at this point in the 2012 Republican primary, Mitt Romney already had enough delegates to lock up the nomination. Halperin then interjected to point out that Romney did not have the nomination locked up until much later than now. The funniest thing about this exchange was the sheepish reaction from Heilemann.

Question to John Heilemann: what's your proof? On his With All Due Respect show this evening, interviewing Ice Cube of NWA, Heilemann flatly stated that the deaths of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri and Freddie Gray in Baltimore were instances of "police brutality." In the Brown case, the grand jury, which included three African-Americans, declined to bring an indictment against Darren Wilson, the Ferguson police officer who shot Brown. And President Obama's Justice Department under then AG Eric Holder cleared Wilson of civil rights violations in the shooting.

In Baltimore, the the only result to date has been a mistrial. So what does Heilemann know that the judicial system doesn't about "police brutality" in those cases? Or was this just a case of Heilemann trying to prove to Ice Cube--who by the way displayed more equanimity than Heileman in his comments on this and other issues--that he was down with the struggle?

"At the end of the day" has been voted the most irritating, hackneyed expression in the English language. If once in a while it slips into our speech, no big whoop. But in her interview on With All Due Respect today, when Hillary's political director, Amanda Renteria, used the expression twice in her very first answer, it caught this NewsBuster's attention.

And so I found myself counting. Three, four--could this really go on? Yes! Five, and . . . a final sixth time before the interview finally ground to an end! Not to be too apocalyptic, but it has been said that losing the New York primary could be cataclysmic for Hillary. Is the end of days on the mind of the Clinton campaign?

Was it good-natured ribbing by John Heilemann, or unvarnished venom? On today's With All Due Respect, Republican Dan Senor made the case--at length--as to why Paul Ryan would make a great candidate to oppose Hillary Clinton. But Senor then proceeded to claim that Ryan would not seek the nomination because the Speaker doesn't think it's "appropriate."

Imagine that a senior Hillary aide--not to mention Hillary herself--were indicted over the email scandal. In a million years, could you imagine John Heilemann asking what such person would have to do to prove his or her innocence? Neither could I. But on today's With All Due Respect, Heilemann asked a Florida criminal defense attorney [not Lewandowski's lawyer]: "What is the legal standard? What does Corey Lewandowski have to prove, to prove his innocence?"

Attorney Whitney Boan politely pointed out that under the Constitution, Lewandowski doesn't have to prove or disprove anything, and that to the contrary the burden is on the State of Florida to prove the charge "beyond a reasonable doubt." Heilemann was appropriately contrite, saying "you're right to call me on having gotten that thing backwards, and thank you for doing that." But the presumption of innocence is ninth-grade civics stuff. That Heilemann would have ever asked such a question in the first place suggests some serious bias.

The mission of the Media Research Center is to create a media culture in America where truth and liberty flourish. The MRC is a research and education organization operating under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, and contributions to the MRC are tax-deductible.